Historically, many livestock breeds were fed grain or blended grains. Over time, additives in the form of nutritional or pharmaceutical materials were added to and mixed in with the blended grains. Oftentimes, grains were ground or otherwise reduced in size to create a more uniform and flowable mixture. The mixtures were stored in a bin or other container, and scooped into feeding devices for access by the animals to be fed.
As time went on, animals went from providing meat and other products to their owners, to provision of products for sale by their owners and, eventually, animals were produced and then sold to other entities for a variety of uses or to be made into a number of products. As the number of animals managed by a single producer increased, means for storing and feeding were developed. Among early developments were those that included a storage portion positioned above feeding stations wherein the feed in the storage portion moved via combination of gravity and open space as the animals consumed feed from the feeding stations. This same general arrangement is still used. However, as the number of animals managed by a single producer increased, so did the array and variety of equipment related to feeding those animals.
Animal production now includes producers that manage hundreds of animals housed in a variety of structures. It has become a science; administering, monitoring and tracking the type, rate, and amount of feed consumed along with any specific nutritional or pharmaceutical additives by each of hundreds or even thousands of animals is becoming more and more commonplace. For some types of livestock and/or breeding stock, such meticulous recordkeeping is required by regulation; for nearly all animal production, having this kind of information allows the producer to carefully monitor resources and increase the efficiency of production.
As mentioned, tracking this kind of data requires specialized equipment. Some of this equipment is geared to centralization of certain tasks either for uniformity and record keeping purposes, or for the purpose of reducing and standardizing the human efforts required; or for the purpose of increasing efficiencies in the process. To that end, a number of feeding related mechanisms have been devised. Specifically, for large confinements or structures in which a large number of animals are housed, mechanisms for delivery of feed to feeders in the individual or group enclosures within the building or structure have been created and implemented with varying levels of success. Many include augers enclosed in housings and some of these housing/auger combinations must be capable of moving feed through curves and inclines. A number of these operate by employing a central feed storage area such as a bin or bins along with means to convey the feed to the feeders. In some arrangements the bin(s) may be positioned centrally to a number of different structures to deliver feed to the feeders within those structures; in other arrangements the bin may be adjacent to or located in a structure in fluid communication with the feeders in that structure only. Permutations of these arrangements abound.
The feed which is provided to animals has changed over time as well. These changes are in response to new information and data as well as market demands. Grinding is still the most common method of feed processing for swine and certain other production. Particle size reduction of grains is known to increase the surface area of the grain, allowing for greater interaction with digestive enzymes, and improving feed efficiency. Smaller particles also improve the ease of handling and mixing characteristics. But, as with everything, there can be too much of a good thing: fine grinding will increase the energy costs of feed processing and may result in the feed bridging in feeders and bulk bins. increased dustiness, and the potential for gastric ulcers. Therefore, the increased costs of fine processing must be offset by the resulting improved feed conversion.
Moisture levels in feed, temperature, fat content and other factors can also effect the flowability of feed. As an example, in recent years, in an effort to increase feed efficiency without negatively offsetting its costs, some producers have begun using additives such as dried distiller's grains which are a byproduct of ethanol production and high in desirable content. However, these additives are “sticky” with moisture and/or fat content and under certain conditions or mixed in certain ratios, can increase bridging of feed in storage bins when it is being outloaded.
Currently, hoppers and powered screw conveyors are used for delivering feed to animals from the feed storage bin or container to the feeder mechanisms located in the animal enclosures. Such feed systems, however, have been known for being problematic and requiring periodic maintenance and attention in order to keep the feed flowing and the systems operating. These problems result in time for maintenance and repairs that, in turn, cause the animals to be without feed until the problem is cured. The industry is so highly dependent on feed regime that even a few hours can make a difference. Flowability both within the storage bin or container and of the feed as it exits the bin continues to be problematic despite several developments meant to address the issue. By way of example, products such as the Flow Hammer by Automated Production Systems attaches to the outside of a feed storage bin and delivers low frequency, high impact strikes to the bin in an effort to reduce or eliminate bridging. Other products vibrate the bin at much higher frequency. Further, at the lower end of most bins is positioned a hopper which is typically generally shaped like an inverted cone; below the hopper is a boot through which the grain flows and drops into the augering system to be moved to the feeding devices in the animal enclosures. Many feeding systems are automatically triggered by sensors related to levels of feed in the feeders at the enclosures, or may be activated by a timed schedule, or some combination of the above. In any case, the idea is to have a system that is as automated and dependable as possible to provide uniform feeding without unplanned disruptions, and with as little human intervention as possible. These features create an efficient system both from the standpoint of feed supply to the animals and from a cost savings standpoint related to moving the animals to finish and from reducing human intervention needs.
What was needed was a device to increase the dependability of feed flow to the animal enclosures and that does so by destroying lumps or balls of feed formed due to humidity, temperature, or feed content in the storage or other bin or during the outloading process as well as reduce feed bridging within the bin during the outloading process.
It is a first objective of the present invention to increase efficiency and dependability in feed outloading from storage bins;
It is a second objective of the present invention to reduce the negative effects of the formation of feed lumps or balls that disrupt feed flow from the bin;
It is a third objective of the present invention to reduce feed bridging in the storage bin during the outloading process.
Other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will be readily appreciated from the following description. The description makes reference to the accompanying drawings, which are provided for illustration of the preferred embodiment. However, such embodiment does not represent the full scope of the invention. The subject matter which the inventor does regard as his invention is particularly pointed out and distinctly claimed in the claims at the conclusion of this specification.